Author: Mike Hearn 2013-04-18 08:32:24
Published on: 2013-04-18T08:32:24+00:00
The writer argues that while it's important to protect against DoS attacks in Bitcoin, it shouldn't be done to the extent of sacrificing features. The lack of DoS protection didn't prevent Bitcoin from launching successfully, and there are still obvious bugs being fixed with every release. The writer also disagrees with shutting down services dependent on replacement, as good users of replacement would still take priority over constantly churning DoS replacements. The testnet is trivially DoSable today, and although a "nextnet" could theoretically be created, the overhead of setting one up doesn't seem worth it. The writer noticed a bug a few days ago but figured it wasn't urgent to update as nobody else had apparently noticed it for years. The proposed alternative to prioritizing work doesn't seem any different DoS wise, and $500 is rather low for the amount of work required.
Updated on: 2023-06-06T15:00:26.730374+00:00